Any State is a Welfare State

[Laissez Faire Republic]

(WARNING!) I'm a libertarian. (WARNING!)

So I was thinking about immigration policy since I haven't really come to a conclusive position on immigration. The most important idea in terms of immigration policy I've come across so far is that you cannot have open borders with a welfare state (from Milton Friedman). Immigrants could just come across and claim welfare, costing more than they contribute to the economy.

One of the more common positions on immigration is that if we did not have a welfare state, open borders would be fine, but with one, they don't work. What if any state is a welfare state though? The classic rights respecting/legitimate government is one that has an army, a police force, and a court system, to protect the rights of citizens. No matter what the tax system, it ends up being that individuals pay for everyone's police and army. If I pay taxes, I'm not just paying for the police to protect me, I'm paying for the police to protect everyone. A safety net.

More police are needed the more people you have. 5 police officers can't look after a country of 300 million. More police officers cost more money, and that cost goes to the taxpayers. Immigration increases the population. Therefore, immigration increases the cost of the police and so increases the tax burden, if the immigrants are less wealthy than the average citizen. This is especially true if the immigrants turn to crime. It costs money to jail people, and so if the immigrants become criminals, the other taxpayers must foot the bill.

Assuming taxation is mandatory (not voluntary)(theft), any new immigrants would be stealing or requiring the money of the original citizens. So consent of the original citizens is required to allow an immigrant in. What does that mean? Does that mean that every single immigrant must be reviewed by every single citizen? Does that mean that racist immigration policies are okay since it would require the consent of the racists to allow someone in? Or does it mean that all immigration should be banned?

Someone help me out.

[Hajaland]

Not entirely sure what constitutes "racist immigration policies"...

[Laissez Faire Republic]

Not entirely sure what constitutes "racist immigration policies"...

Well something like "Only blacks/whites allowed in this country". Judging the immigrants by their race.

[Fiscis]

The race of those entering the state doesn't change anything. If it is Canadians entering the US no racists will throw a fit even though they have the same impact as Mexicans entering the US for the same reasons.

[Aggicificicerous]

Sure, if we assume that all immigrants just show up, claim welfare benefits, and sit in the park drinking cheap beer from brown paper bags. That's fairly rare though. Immigrants generally come for work, and thus add money into the tax pool.

[Free Missouri]

(WARNING!) I'm a libertarian. (WARNING!)

So I was thinking about immigration policy since I haven't really come to a conclusive position on immigration. The most important idea in terms of immigration policy I've come across so far is that you cannot have open borders with a welfare state (from Milton Friedman). Immigrants could just come across and claim welfare, costing more than they contribute to the economy.

One of the more common positions on immigration is that if we did not have a welfare state, open borders would be fine, but with one, they don't work. What if any state is a welfare state though? The classic rights respecting/legitimate government is one that has an army, a police force, and a court system, to protect the rights of citizens. No matter what the tax system, it ends up being that individuals pay for everyone's police and army. If I pay taxes, I'm not just paying for the police to protect me, I'm paying for the police to protect everyone. A safety net.

More police are needed the more people you have. 5 police officers can't look after a country of 300 million. More police officers cost more money, and that cost goes to the taxpayers. Immigration increases the population. Therefore, immigration increases the cost of the police and so increases the tax burden, if the immigrants are less wealthy than the average citizen. This is especially true if the immigrants turn to crime. It costs money to jail people, and so if the immigrants become criminals, the other taxpayers must foot the bill.

Assuming taxation is mandatory (not voluntary)(theft), any new immigrants would be stealing or requiring the money of the original citizens. So consent of the original citizens is required to allow an immigrant in. What does that mean? Does that mean that every single immigrant must be reviewed by every single citizen? Does that mean that racist immigration policies are okay since it would require the consent of the racists to allow someone in? Or does it mean that all immigration should be banned?

Someone help me out.

When we're talking about a "welfare state" you have to realize what we are talking about. It's not about things that exist to provide for the "common welfare" (the few things that do require a level of coordination that only multiple cooperating levels of government can provide (I say multiple levels because the federal government running everything would be a nightmare because most government employees and elected officials don't deal with the same issues as rural Americans.) (Police, Fire, Military, inter-state roads, certain intra-state roads), but about states that attempt to provide everything (free healthcare, free money, free/subsidized phones, free/subsidized tv, etc. etc. etc.)

[Esternial]

I can see you're confused, as somehow you've gotten the notion that your tax money is still your money. You don't still own the rent you pay.

There, problem solved. Government can do whatever it wants with its money if it believes that that money is spent for good reasons, reasons you (and I) very clearly not always understand.

Glad to help.

[The New Sea Territory]

All states are "welfare" states for those who own property, the means of production...because defending that is the state's main reason for existing.

[Free Missouri]

(WARNING!) I'm a libertarian. (WARNING!)

So I was thinking about immigration policy since I haven't really come to a conclusive position on immigration. The most important idea in terms of immigration policy I've come across so far is that you cannot have open borders with a welfare state (from Milton Friedman). Immigrants could just come across and claim welfare, costing more than they contribute to the economy.

One of the more common positions on immigration is that if we did not have a welfare state, open borders would be fine, but with one, they don't work. What if any state is a welfare state though? The classic rights respecting/legitimate government is one that has an army, a police force, and a court system, to protect the rights of citizens. No matter what the tax system, it ends up being that individuals pay for everyone's police and army. If I pay taxes, I'm not just paying for the police to protect me, I'm paying for the police to protect everyone. A safety net.

More police are needed the more people you have. 5 police officers can't look after a country of 300 million. More police officers cost more money, and that cost goes to the taxpayers. Immigration increases the population. Therefore, immigration increases the cost of the police and so increases the tax burden, if the immigrants are less wealthy than the average citizen. This is especially true if the immigrants turn to crime. It costs money to jail people, and so if the immigrants become criminals, the other taxpayers must foot the bill.

Assuming taxation is mandatory (not voluntary)(theft), any new immigrants would be stealing or requiring the money of the original citizens. So consent of the original citizens is required to allow an immigrant in. What does that mean? Does that mean that every single immigrant must be reviewed by every single citizen? Does that mean that racist immigration policies are okay since it would require the consent of the racists to allow someone in? Or does it mean that all immigration should be banned?

Someone help me out.

When we're talking about a "welfare state" you have to realize what we are talking about. It's not about things that exist to provide for the "common welfare" (the few things that do require a level of coordination that only multiple cooperating levels of government can provide (I say multiple levels because the federal government running everything would be a nightmare because most government employees and elected officials don't deal with the same issues as rural Americans.) (Police, Fire, Military, inter-state roads, certain intra-state roads), but about states that attempt to provide everything (free healthcare, free money, free/subsidized phones, free/subsidized tv, etc. etc. etc.)

[Ashmoria]

stop worrying about welfare states and start understanding that we cant have open border or we might be swamped with far more immigrants than we can handle.

[Community Values]

stop worrying about welfare states and start understanding that we cant have open border or we might be swamped with far more immigrants than we can handle.

What's the limit? When do we have to many?

[Genivaria]

Completely open borders is a bad idea with or without social welfare.

[Genivaria]

stop worrying about welfare states and start understanding that we cant have open border or we might be swamped with far more immigrants than we can handle.

What's the limit? When do we have to many?

The number isn't relevant.
The frequency however could be an issue if too many came all at once which can be handled with a few protocols in place.
Really it's a non-issue.

[Community Values]

What's the limit? When do we have to many?

The number isn't relevant.
The frequency however could be an issue if too many came all at once which can be handled with a few protocols in place.
Really it's a non-issue.

But still, what is too much "frequency", what is "too many"? Is one million too many? two million? Everyone talks about too much immigration, but no one says the amount. And honestly, I'm kind of curious to know.

[Genivaria]

The number isn't relevant.
The frequency however could be an issue if too many came all at once which can be handled with a few protocols in place.
Really it's a non-issue.

But still, what is too much "frequency", what is "too many"? Is one million too many? two million? Everyone talks about too much immigration, but no one says the amount. And honestly, I'm kind of curious to know.

Ask an economist.

[Community Values]

But still, what is too much "frequency", what is "too many"? Is one million too many? two million? Everyone talks about too much immigration, but no one says the amount. And honestly, I'm kind of curious to know.

Ask an economist.

Alright, it's a good thing I have Milton Friedman's number, be right back /s

[Jute]

Sure, if we assume that all immigrants just show up, claim welfare benefits, and sit in the park drinking cheap beer from brown paper bags. That's fairly rare though. Immigrants generally come for work, and thus add money into the tax pool.

Study: Undocumented immigrants pay billions in taxes

[Community Values]

Sure, if we assume that all immigrants just show up, claim welfare benefits, and sit in the park drinking cheap beer from brown paper bags. That's fairly rare though. Immigrants generally come for work, and thus add money into the tax pool.

Study: Undocumented immigrants pay billions in taxes

Do we know how much they get in welfare? It doesn't matter how much they pay if they are causing a net loss.

[Mike the Progressive]

The race of those entering the state doesn't change anything. If it is Canadians entering the US no racists will throw a fit even though they have the same impact as Mexicans entering the US for the same reasons.

That's not necessarily true... a Canadian entering in the country will most likely be more affluent than say somebody who is Mexican that enters into the country.

To some extent, yes, any time you let people in, costs and needs will increase as there are more people to police, more people using roads and bridges and so on. However, in a free market environment, more people means more goods and services are being purchased. Provided we're not a "nanny state" -which we can be- it's economically beneficial.

[Aggicificicerous]

Study: Undocumented immigrants pay billions in taxes

Do we know how much they get in welfare? It doesn't matter how much they pay if they are causing a net loss.

Workers rarely get welfare. Illegal immigrants rarely have the means or courage to apply for welfare. Do you have any evidence that these people are on welfare?

[Community Values]

Do we know how much they get in welfare? It doesn't matter how much they pay if they are causing a net loss.

Workers rarely get welfare. Illegal immigrants rarely have the means or courage to apply for welfare. Do you have any evidence that these people are on welfare?

No, that's why I asked Jute.

[Stadenwick]

I can see you're confused, as somehow you've gotten the notion that your tax money is still your money. You don't still own the rent you pay.

There, problem solved. Government can do whatever it wants with its money if it believes that that money is spent for good reasons, reasons you (and I) very clearly not always understand.

Glad to help.

^^ Agreed completely

[Laissez Faire Republic]

Sure, if we assume that all immigrants just show up, claim welfare benefits, and sit in the park drinking cheap beer from brown paper bags. That's fairly rare though. Immigrants generally come for work, and thus add money into the tax pool.

I'm talking theoretically/philosophically. I didn't mean to make any judgement about immigrants in that sense.

[Laissez Faire Republic]

I can see you're confused, as somehow you've gotten the notion that your tax money is still your money. You don't still own the rent you pay.

There, problem solved. Government can do whatever it wants with its money if it believes that that money is spent for good reasons, reasons you (and I) very clearly not always understand.

Glad to help.

So is your view that all citizens are just renting land from the government and don't actually own it?

When you say "Government can do whatever it wants with it's money" what do you mean by government? The majority of citizens in a vote? The elite few in the actual government? All of the citizens individually?

Thanks for responding.

[Laissez Faire Republic]

Do we know how much they get in welfare? It doesn't matter how much they pay if they are causing a net loss.

Workers rarely get welfare. Illegal immigrants rarely have the means or courage to apply for welfare. Do you have any evidence that these people are on welfare?

I don't know if this is a reliable source but it's what I could find.

http://cis.org/Welfare-Use-Immigrant-Native-Households